The Most Common Cognitive Bias 

😂

Lmaooo

Then comes the question: What kind of single are you? Odd number or whole digit?

@@nakumavecaan254 Lmao, that's the perfect response

Thats how I became a huge antisemite

@@starfiring ?

@@dariusnoname12 I still don't get it?

@@dariusnoname12 OHHHHH I GET IT NOW!

@@dariusnoname12 THANKS

That isn’t multiplying by two

Reminds me of the card game Eleusis

@@zzzaphod8507 Hadn't heard of it, but indeed it sounds similar. Thanks.

I love when teachers would make a game like that but turn it into sort of role playing as actual professionals. My one teacher did this with the stock market in grade 7. and he had a bunch of guests come in and pretend to be business owners that would pitch us their business ideas, we walked around the room by ourselves to each business owner. We'd get a bunch of chips and could invest them in whoever we wanted and there were several rounds. And the situation for each business would change with each business every round, and we could redistribute our investments and their stock price would change every round. Then we'd tally our profits, or losses at rhe end. The results would sort of follow basic principles, like the shady, greedy big shot companies ended up tanking, the hard-working mom and pop store turned out great, but also he threw in a few unexpected results, and then some just turned out how they seemed they would, and then there were hard truths as well, like some of the shady businesses would do good... He did a good job at showing the seemingly random aspect of investing in hindsight. But honestly i think your game is better. it teaches a fundamental principle which ironically are sometimes the harder things for prople to wrap their minds around. The stock market game just taught how a certain system works which is good to know... But its when people misunderstand fundamental, encompassing principles like scientific method, that ideas like flat earth arise. In any case, games like that were fun as hell in school lol you sound like a great teacher.

Its actually very hard to do it. Admitting to yourself that you have a bias marginally changed your opinion on a lot of things. Its called bias blindspot. The only way of eliminating bias is by doing research on the proposed topic to gather information to increase your understanding and confidence of an opinion on it.

Its called introspection illusion sorry*

@@rahulsuri8961 I'm confused, you seem to think you're disagreeing with me, but nothing that you wrote precludes anything that I wrote.

@@susieusmaximus5330 It doesn't look like he's trying to disagree with you, it looks like he's musing on your point. I know the done thing on online comment threads is to pick opposing views and fight it out, but I don't think that's what's happening here.

This is why whenever im talking to someone about stuff politically its very worrying when they say "oh im completely unbiased" because whats most likely happening is they are pretending they dont have biases and arent taking any measures against the biases they and every other person has.

They tried to find an example where doubling would not work.

+Josh Henton yea in a way but if u actually watched it till the end and heard what he had to say about this experiment. it may enlighten you on why they were doing that.... lol

+hjaylee still annoyed

+Josh Henton That was kinda the point of the video, as he explains near the end.

+Josh Henton jep, I also got annoyed they kept using increasing numbers :(

I learned what you are trying to communicate from a youth leader who was, and still is a scientist at ORNL. To fail is not a terrible thing, it is one step closer to success.....etc and so on and so forth.!! "If at first you don't succeed, try, try again...."

My experience has been that tests offer insight on what you're still getting wrong, and that grades reflect how much you're getting right. The main deficiency I see is that the system is somewhat geared towards knowing stuff instead of being good at thinking. One of the reasons I've always appreciated science and math is that good thinking skills can let you figure out stuff you don't know by extrapolating from what you do know.

@@stevepseudonym445 Very astute observation. 👍

Tell that to scientific journals that won't publish null results. We're all sat on gold mines of information we gain from "failed" experiments with no means or motivation to share it.

Yeah nowadays ppl just give up or don't try at all for fear of failing.Heck Im guilty of that at times as well though it might be more that my profession is very strict in safety regulations.

yeah man my first thought halfway through the video was descending cus no one was asking that and by the end i got it, it was indeed descending lol i wouldve tried fractions and stuff too , programming FTW!

My first thought was of non integers

Looking at the other programmers in chat and my own correct assumption pretty quick into the video I think we effectively got the answer to how that would have gone lol. Gotta break your code to figure out if there's anything wrong.

as a mathematician, my first thought after “not multiplied by 2” was “increasing powers of the first number”, and then after seeing the absolute random numbers get through I would have tried imaginary and irrational numbers to see what happened. Didn’t think of descending order tho, lmao

How is this logical whatsoever? The most logical thing would be to find the most reasonable solution ie multiplying by 2. Your sequence is completely illogical if it was the first thing thought of. Your skepticism that you might already naturally have more of, was reinforced even further from the title of the video, so of course you would do the weirdest thing. Rather than thinking logically, it's closer to problem solving ability and critical thinking skills.

Hence: “The exception that proves the rule.”

Always best to go with what’s most obvious. Try the simple thing. Multiply by two. Not right? Instantly think what else that sequence can be. Multiples of two, ascending order, non repeating. Ask in order of likelihood in your opinion. For me, I would have said 3, 6, 9 Then 9, 6, 3 That happens to be where you get it. Don’t group them into a sequence like 3, 3, 2. Then if he says no you’re in a guessing game. Now apply this to everything in life and you’re bing chillin

​@@PhaythGaming not jong xina?

@@PhaythGaming My process would have been 16 32 64: follows yes, doubling? no 2 4 7 follows yes (eliminate only even numbers), any whole numbers? no. 111 follows no (attempting to eliminate "non repeating" as a rule). -1 -2 -3 follows no At this point I've probably confused myself out of solving it, because now I have several things that are not correct but that I can't directly eliminate. It could have to do with non-repeating (has to be ascending, so that's half right), it could have to be positive (problem is the increasing negative is reducing). Now I have to come up with tests to either eliminate these variables or incorporate them, and I haven't yet touched on the more simple "increasing" pattern. The moral of this post is that negative results are not necessarily a good thing as they can easily mislead, while positive results can give us clear answers. I can clearly judge that doubling and evens are not part of the pattern, but my negative results only tell me that repeats and negatives might not be part of the pattern, and I need multiple further tests to figure out anything useful.

I think it's reasonable to test both positives and negatives. After all, determining whether 16, 8, 4 follows the rule isn't inherently more informative than determining whether 16, 32, 64 does. If 16, 32, 64 didn't follow the rule, that immediately changes your approach as it disproves the initial assumption. It's only once you've established some pattern on which to base a hypothesis that you can try to disprove that hypothesis. Continuing to choose tests that fit the established pattern is the problematic step, not establishing some pattern to begin with.

that mentality doesn't follow my rule though.

So i think that its True that I exist "If you think something is true, you should try as hard as you can to disprove it. Only then can you really get at the truth and not fool yourself." A Few Months later... *HeLlo thEre ExisTanciAl Crisis!!!*

Flat earthers tried this, and they got the wrong answer

@85 85 You mean like vaccines cause autism, earth is flat, the government is turning the frogs gay and so on?

@85 85 No u I mean if you believe the things that I pointed out Like any of them

@AmplifiedSilence Please do not curse.

1, 2, 2.9

Im 200th like thank me later

My rule: complex multiples of 1

My rule: milk,cereal,plate,fork

Occams razor

Getting kids involved wouldn't help. Get these people someone who knows how to troubleshoot.

That's sounds like a lazy ass professor lmao

thats just how i was taught math man

Smart cookie.

No idea what this means

@@Yamaazaka pattern matching is basically confirming what you believe with information that agrees with it instead of looking for all angles edge case is pretty much trial and error using what doesn’t work to get closer to what does but to do that you have to be able to reflect which allot of people can’t do nowadays

The biggest reason for that is you have to suspect that there is a deeper pattern than surface level. Without having someone or something to challenge or confirm the correct pattern, it's easy to simply confirm the bias.

ḭ̞̠̙̺̐̒͐͐͘͢͠ ǐ̵̡̫̟̜̠̜̅̓́̂ŝ̸̴̳̥̬̲ͪ͂́̐͢ a̴̧̢̲̘̱̲̐͐ͭ͗͠ ņ̢̼̤̫̬̎̔̎ͣ͂͛ų̻̺̳͈̘̝ͤͦ̽ͣ̆m̨̫̤̠̙̰̠ͮ̇ͧͨ̚b̵̴̵̷̖͚̞̞̉͂̾̉ḛ̱̳͇͙̹̃̒ͦ̽͝͝r̢̭̜̻̩̬͗̌ͮͦ̐͆.̴̡̧̤̖͚͈̙̆ͫ̾̂

@@YISP7 it's imaginary, but yes it is a number

What if Derek was prepared and he said his rule was for ascending real numbers, or even integers to be more specific

Actually, i=i^1; (-1)=i^2; (-i)=i^3 (because i^3=(i^2)*(i^1)= (-1)*i=i^3) Bonus: i^4=1 (because i^4=(i^2)^2=(-1)^2=1)

@@huongvu-yz2nn who asked?

The Black Swan is fine for examining what happened . . . but it often can be do late to do anything but react . . . wouldn't be better to anticipate the problem . . . and prevent it or have correction in place before it happens . . . consider "The Gray Rhino" by Michele Wucker, the brilliant business analyst and author.

Yeah, that was what gave it away for me

I think that this experience varies a lot depending on people's math knowledge, e.g. I thought multiply by 2, first two numbers must add to a number equal or bigger than the third and then the right answer whilst people who don't use math as often would probably just keep the 2x logic throughout the whole interview. This just shows how different people have different perspectives and different understandings of what's put in from of them

@@goncalomorais4930 My first guess was "consecutive whole powers of a whole number" xd Kinda funny because my first suggestion would've hence been (1, 1, 1) and he would've said "no"

@UCleXwpsuAo8dDTwxcrc294g your profile pic got me you asshole😂

Yeah, my first thought was 'all integers' just because it would be super easy for him to confirm.

same.

yea

coffee, 99999999999999999, ", /,,

I would have tried irrational numbers and imaginary numbers.

ZeroGrxvity I would have done fractions

Wow

T'Challa: What do "2,4,8" and Wakanda have in common? They *follow my rule*

@@belgianwaffles3877 humm who cares?

Every passing second has a number that is larger than the last.

Follows my rule

Can confirm. As a programmer, I wanted to throttle all these guessers early on, and I figured out his rule fairly quickly even with their lame-ass guessing.

@@LtPowers same - "figured out" my be a bit overstating it, but it was my next guess once they tried their first non-doubling sequence. But yeah, as a programmer it's more of a habit than a lack of bias. "Oh, the code works now, so I might be done with this assignment... can I find a case where it doesn't work, though?"

@@tokeivo Oh it requires me to input a number. Ok so now let me input a letter, what about a different language, what about a number outside the range, what about nothing being input. And only through all those tests do we know that you can truthfully only enter a number.

And honestly when I get an error, I kind of feel better. Because fixing the problem is easier than not knowing the problem.

So basically the greatest strength of a programmer is mental gymnastics. Got it.

Could you tell me more about the rules and perhaps give an example? Sorry if I'm asking too much, but hey, YT comments....

Especially when it's becoming evident their partner is smarter

@@cannabinized LOL "upsetting the natural order"

Yeah, it actually annoys the hell out of me how easily people give up or shy away from any sort of mental challenge. It's a wonder homo sapiens ever made it this far.

@@Zeuts85 Hmm or they could just be doing something better ?

At that timestamp he's talking about swans.

nah, people who like to play devil's advocate are sometimes just dicks

mostly for the lulz

I think what you mean is that, sometimes curious ("smart") people, seek out other opinions or perspectives about something that is widely believed in. Because in an instance that someone might have a whole different view on something must mean, more than that more than one person has concluded to believe that as well. Also because in many situations there is always opposing sides, and so there might be actual realities with "holes" or faults on their beliefs.

@@aqfanjames Playing Devil's Advocate doesn't make you a dick. It's important to entertain possibilities outside of the established facts because it's impossible in many cases to account for everyone's bias or every single variable.

@@thekeyandthegate4093 Yes, entertaining other possibilities is important, and there is nothing wrong with playing devil's advocate. I think Aqfan James is reacting like this because some people will express opinions they clearly believe in, and then claim to be playing devils advocate just to escape backlash.

Yep, one of better tricks of sudoku

Every time I discuss Wordle's hard mode with someone, I think of this video

@@cailin5301 lol

yes, this is how I play Wordle too. I'm quite happy to get five letters eliminated in the first guess.

Hard to impossible sudoku makes me act up because (this might be the wrong strategy) I can't backtrack the steps I made.

c1ue scroll 07 Follows my rule

69, 420, 666

1,69,420,666,1337,58008

InCrIpTiOn what is 58008

did u mean 80085? which is BOOBS

Yeah this goes for anything with apposing sides. Or just any circumstances that have any level of problem solving to figure out the truth.

What courtroom drama was it

I really don't recall. I'm in my 50s now.

I agree. Really, it’s true. You should do your own research.

That's just how we are wired. If I think blue is the best color I will search evidence on why it is the best. I would never string my query to say "why is green better than blue" if my end goal is to prove why blue is better

@@ineedabetterpfp2485 Perhaps you are making a joke, but if not, you've misunderstood the original comment. You say that you agree, but what they were saying was that you _shouldn't_ tell someone to do their own research. If they already have a belief that you think is wrong, you need to present them with the evidence that it is wrong. They are very unlikely to go away and find that evidence for themselves.

@@kylemilford8758 The question of the "best colour" is not a factual question, though. It is purely a matter of individual taste. If you like blue best, then blue is the best colour, for you. It is not something that you can find evidence on, other than the evidence that comes from within. Of course, it is conceivable that you just haven't experienced enough colours, and that there might be a colour out there that you would prefer, if only you could see it, and it would take research to find that colour. But the research would just be to find the colour in the first place, and to judge your own emotional response to it, not to find a analysis of its quality that someone else has written.

@@omp199 Yeah I was making a joke

Within reason... I think that falling off a 300ft cliff with no safety would end in serious injury or death. I'm not in a hurry to disprove that one! But also its inverse: "If you think something is untrue, you should try as hard as you can to prove it." That one is often lacking in the scientific community.

Yep

@@TheBaggyT Your claim is actually not true. To prove a point, you need it to be right in every circumstance it claimed to fit, but to disprove it, you only need one. So if one rule is proved to be not true, it doesn't matter if in some particular cases it succeeds.

@@oliverhou5354 That's a fairly simple way of looking at things... most things and systems are fairly complex. Just because one aspect may not fit a particular theory, can you write off all aspects? No, there is more to investigate.

People need to do this with their worldview. I love doing this. I am a Christian and I love hearing the Athiestic perspectives or other religions. This is the major reason I love debating (in a calm, organized manner) because either me or the other person will either walk away with more faith in our stance (in whatever) or we are closer to the truth.

After a couple of times of people's examples and Derek saying "correct but not my rule " I thought 3 numbers just like you. I thought of 3 and they were ascending but it wasn't a conscious choice to make them ascending - more just following his pattern.

Me too

@@jayceewedmak9524 I suppose recognizing you're following his pattern is catching the rule!

Well it might be your own rule if you want to test people like this guy did.

Well what's not a 'random' number I thought that's what it might be at first but like that's stupid because that just means there is no rule

haha

ROFL RELATABLE

proceeds to jump out bedroom window

Why did u edit it duude

go out and study

Agree!

If you're (2nd person subjective definition not accusatory) entrenched in thinking that way it's even more important to break your preconceived notions. Before edit: If you're (2nd person dative definition not accusatory) entrenched in thinking that way it's even more important to break your preconceived notions.

@@lvlupproductions2480 2nd person possessive

@@nineteenfortyeight6762 Why would that be possessive?

Agree. This literally proved no bias at all. The people assume that a guy with a camera is asking them questions about a sequence of numbers that requires deep thought. He could have used any "rule" he wanted and gotten the same result. Positive numbers. Numbers divisible by one. Etc. This was not at all informative or interesting.

Same I got before anyone did in the video

​@@kai-gg2ip I did too, but it's possible that they got it pretty quickly too. We were being shown several groups after all.

Well not really, cause you havent gotten any wrong answers yet. You should still try 0,0,0 and 3,2,1. At the end of your guesses these could still be correct. Even when you know about the bias you still fall into it

Nah, school teaches everyone that being wrong and failing at things only amounts to embarrassment,disappointment and feeling like a failure.

You must be old

@@skenda Yes

@Inescapable Justice I give up, what is the answer to this "Begging the question" fallacy? There is only one thing that I know absolutely, I have a conscious. Nothing else that I believe or have read or have seen or sensed is absolutely true. No, I am not lying to myself. I believe.

@Inescapable Justice I have no idea what you're going on about with the two false statements-you should probably be more clear as to the point you're trying to make

Alpha Core Thank you!

Yep, it's The confirmation bias test.

Alpha Core Damn you, stop reminding me of "The Game" :D

Viktor Weinkauf dammit i lost

+Slade Wilson my thoughts exactly

Way to pat yourself on the back, remember humility

@@jam9297 lmaooo

Any update how it went? What is the age of your students?

You arent special lol. He deliberatley cuts out all the poeple that naturaly come to pick numbers like that. This goes for all his videos like this. The point is to show the most extreme version of the bias to demonstrate it effectivley. You cant apply this as a rule so heavily to the general population especialy across time people will and wont suffer the bias on and off. That said generaly you would expect every single person to suffer this particular bias fairly often due to the large number of situations it applies to.

Oh a math teacher! Cool! So I have a question. What other rule besides doubling would satisfy both the sequence [2, 4, 8...] as well as infinite other sequences? How about we let k be arbitrarily positive. Then let's raise k to the nth power, start n at one and increase n by 1 for each successive term. This would give us [3, 9, 27...] for k = 3 and [4, 16, 64...] for k =4 and [5, 25, 125] for k =5, etc. Would that work, do you think?

Teaching has afaik always been a form of art, however it has lost the art-aspect of it through the years hence why gaining knowledge might seem boring. Our desire to learn has been forced into a set path (aka school), which works for the majority. Sadly, it is a shallow way of teaching.

This is the best way of teaching: ask questions and assign work that makes the student think long and hard about something.

@@TheWchurchill4pm It is a good way to teach indeed, but I wouldn't say there is such a thing as a "best" method for teaching. Mostly due to everyone being different, with their own methods for learning.

As a young autistic adult I believe that there is a best method for teaching and that it ironically lies in exactly what you’ve already described. It lies in the idea that there is no one way to teach for everyone. Consider the notion that students pick favorite teachers all the time. Following the reasoning that the teacher that connects with the most students and teaches the most students the most is the best teacher, wouldn’t it make sense that the best teaching style is to understand that there is no one teaching style?

Infotainment...

This dudes videos are fantastic.

@@jacobbernstein7249 he’s biased hard on his sponsored videos tho

One of the proving method I learnt at school is to find 1 AND ONLY 1 example that contradicts the theory. I was like: damnn its so easy to disprove something. But yet, aft this video i realized its not that easy

Do you do that for your religion?

@@dominicstocker5144 What do you mean?

But then where is the ordering?

-3, -2 , -1

Posi vibes only

I originally thought the rule was they were all positive integers

The goal was to figure out HIS rule. So as Adam pointed out, -3, -2, -1 would follow the rule.

Very true! Everyone (including) looked for a more restricted time rule.

The answer isn't trivial, it's just less rigid, specific, and complex than at first appears, which actually is a good analogy for other types of information and patterns in the world. And the real key is the process to which we discover truth. Do we ever test hypotheses that we're confident will give us disconfirming results, or do we never test hypotheses that we're confident will give us disconfirming results? Asking only questions that will confirm our hypothesis is what we call confirmation bias.

Incorrect. It is MOST trivial to answer with "16" when presented with a sequence of "2, 4, 8". Those are powers of two. This is actually the most common and trivial answer you'd get, even from a child that has a bit of brain and can multiply by 2. Answering with "just a random numbers in ascending order" is actually very non-trivial, because the sequence you were presented with (2, 4, 8) clearly follows a rule - multiplication by 2. This rule is easily spotted by any sane person who knows kindergaten-level mathematics. That is why trying to break the rule and saying "numbers in ascending order" is very counterintuitive and non-trivial.

@@reportsreports7149 There are degrees of "trivial", and I'm pretty sure sorting numbers is more trivial than multiplication. Multiplication is certainly not kinder garden-level math. I wonder what kind of kinder garden you went to. I would say, most people don't want to think about math at all during their everyday life, and in this case they are asked on the street. Their first suggestion is obvious and it is the correct and sane answer. And it's just about complicated enough, in that setting, where they are not prepared. Why would anyone ask them on the street if they can sort numbers? Then they are given the reply that it's wrong, and they loose what little confidence they had, and so they are mostly just guessing wildly. Because, it has to be non-trivial and they already got it wrong. That means the answer has to be more complicated, not simpler. That is the expectation. That is their intuition. Is this an example of group think and bias? Yes and no.

@@lucasyates1893 The answer is as trivial as sorting numbers. It doesn't get much more trivial than that. No one who is asked a math question on the street would expect to be told to sort numbers. They expect something more complicated. And this, I would emphasize, is to a greater degree true when it comes to problems of a mathematical and logical nature. So I would argue, while this example has elements of bias in it, it's not only that. The question was intentionally made to confuse people, in a topic people easily get confused with. Many would even fear it.

I thought it was the previous 2 numbers multiplied by eachother at first, so I was thinking about 32 256 8192 being the next numbers but that quickly became incorrect :(

@@dxlaser3397 I also thought it was the previous 2 numbers multiplied by each other, but didn't get anywhere near trying to calculate 32 x 256 in my head :D

@@AsPEctFAm I just used my laptop calculator xD

Well thank you for saying this bc i did feel super clever 😭

Trying the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result is the definition of insanity. If it's not "multiply by two", then it must be SOMETHING else. In addition, I would expect it to be something relatively simple (i.e. something a normal person can calculate in their head) and not some esoteric math because that would just be pointless. I would have tried 3, 9, 27 first, then 2, 3, 11, then 2, 8, 4. Then I would have guessed the correct rule. Watching people try the exact same thing again and again and again was very frustrating. You are not getting any new information ffs, change your approach already!

Your take-away was bad, but it isn't your fault. It's because the video was bad. The real take-away should be: when observing a trend, come up with many competing hypotheses and attempt to test them all simultaneously.

Miya Sensuree Oh my goodness, that's hilarious! :P

Miya Sensuree great job

Best comment ever!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Miya Sensuree copy pasta..

dem copy and paste skills!

This puzzle has appeared lots of places, I originally found it in Harry Potter and the Methods of Rationality lol. Possibly it was invented in the 'The Black Swan' book he mentioned and then people passed it around through word of mouth? Edit: another comment said they saw this problem in 1987. It's just an old problem.

​@@blartversenwaldiii Wikipedia says the 2-4-6 task was created by Peter Cathcart Wason in 1960.

@@shaman_bez_bubna ahh thanks

let me guess, american?

Makes amazing cleaning products too, big fan

Zorro del Demonio why

I was just thinking that.

Cheesy Chicken Lost

***** Best quote. I miss it so much :'(

-9999999, 50, 1337 Fits the rule.

Occam's Razor!

Admittedly very early on my initial guess was ascending non-consecutive numbers, until he said the "11, 12, 13" was okay, that's when it was obvious. I'm like shouting at the screen "people it's ascending numbers, that's all!!" lol

as a programmer I'm guilty of this spent 30 minutes coding a touchscreen detection system I had one done, better than my system, already layig around

@@kevinw712 Until you test '1,1,1' and '3,2,1', it could also just be 'any 3 positive numbers', and without '-3,-2,-1', and similar, you also have the open possibility of 'any 3 numbers'

*simpler

Accurate. Many people know how to write code that works. Few know how to write code that can't not work.

Ah yes bug fixing, the actual hard part of coding

What would a sane person do? Don't do that.

@@Zerububble It's the other way around. What is something no sane person would do? Do that.

That's how I find bugs in video games and apps

Yes! I'm on chapter 3 right now, that's immediately what I thought of. You think you know what the rules are because everything you've seen confirms your theory, and then you get to a puzzle that throws your assumptions out the window. I feel like my recent experience with that game made me wise very quickly to what was going on.

Thanks for mentioning this game, it sounds very interesting, I'm checking it out now!

which reminds me of The Witness, where trial and error is supposed to chip away at the rule, and making assumptions really bites you on the ass.

@@Nazareadain I also played through the Witness, it's a quality puzzle game, although I found it quite difficult

Thanks for the recommendation.

So true, I want to know if 0, 0, 1 and/or -1,-2,-3 fit his rule.

KoenZyxYssel 0=0(-2)>(-3) so that would not work. The rule is x

For most purposes it's good to assume 0 is 0 and -1 is greater than -2 but when you're taking measurements 0 is rarely 0 and -2 is almost always greater than -1. If his numbers don't have to be unique the rule could be x= |z| but I'm still not sure if that's his rule.

+broccoli But the numbers the other people proposed did not follow exponents but was approved.

I believe he chose the powers of 2 on purpose, as a red herring. It can be hard to take a step back and try to find a less specific rule rather than a more specific one.

Think of all the times there was a possibility that someone banged you in your sleep.

And now examine your house security

@@pedestrian2530 I remember. Happy memories.

@@pedestrian2530 I would not like to think about bein raped

@@pedestrian2530 are you saying that was really Alexis Texas? Dam I ain't watched porn in ages I just realised shes prolly old now. Edit: just did a quick Google search. She still got it.

Is your rule ?

Whatever it is there exists porn if it.

correct

shrek and sonic?

sure

+alpha omikron and you are not guniuses, it was simply easy.

+alpha omikron I don't know what a guniuses is but I'm certainly not one

And this a four minute video featuring 4 different people so you took twice as long to figure it out. Good for you

Joshua Fox It was probably edited too?

Decore Noah Hats off to not getting what I meant

Uh oh someones getting worked up!

No I've never heard of videos tell me more!

I really wanted someone to say 3,2,1 after the 2,4,7 established the likely answer.

Same!

I thought it was "they're all whole numbers" for a while until I remembered he said "in a specific order"

Same lol

I figured it out even before that. I wonder if he interviewed people who got it real quick and didn t keep it in the footage?

It's always been like this.

@@jordyv.703 Except I'm old enough to remember that it has not been. There's always been an element of that, but since the age of the internet everyone with an opinion and a wifi connection thinks they're a "news outlet," which has amplified that element into the mainstream.

@@LA2047 It's just a lot more obvious right now because of how easy it is to communicate. These cognitive biases have been in our dna for probably millions of years. If you really want an example of this, just look at religion. They are a result of seeking an answer instead of trying to prove it wrong. It's just how we are as a species

@@jordyv.703 Can't argue with that.

@@LA2047 I get your point too though. It's easier for cognitive biases to play out now because there's less consequences when you're wrong.

1 3 545

+Christopher Doukakis NO

So does 9 11

no it doesn't.

it's only 2 numbers, it needs to be 9 11 2001.

im 9 and i figured this out in 10 seconds lol ur all dumb and im not dumb XDDD

Wam xDDDDDDDDDDDD

Well, at least you didn't have to look for long :P

khatack :)

Plenty of those comments around it seems.

I got it! 10, 20, 40! ...wait that's not right

To be honest asking 3, 6, 12 wasn't completely wrong. The rule could have been stricter than multiplication by 2, for example powers of 2 in an ascending order.

@@Darthgipsyjoe or odd numbers

Yeah listening to them keep trying the same thing over and over was frustrating

@@Darthgipsyjoe or multiply thelast 2 numbers

Everything about this sentence is false.

+Andrew Van Lare The Word incorrectly is allways spelled incorrectly except it was spelled incorrectly.

A sentence cannot be true or false unless it contains a statement. A sentence declaring a sentence to be true or false does not contain a statement unless the sentence in question contains a statement. Neither of your sentences can be demonstrated to be stating anything, therefore they are both neither true nor false.

Actually the statement is that the sentence is true or false that is a statement so I don't know what you are talking about

+Andrew Van Lare A sentence would need to make sense in order to constitute a statement. If I declare, "this bike is false," that sentence would not be true or false, since it does not contain a logical statement.

A delusional comment, from a round fluffy flock member.

@85 85 no it’s not. Religion is a belief. Actually you can’t proof it. You belief it or not.

@@jannetteberends8730 Thats worst imo

Even better than trying to disprove a rule is to find the ways in which a rule is a helpful simplification, and then find the limits of where that simplification is no longer valid. For modestly imprecise measurements over reasonably short distances, the earth IS flat. But there are very many contexts in which a flat earth simplification fails to predict important phenomena.

@@jannetteberends8730 That's the problem. They never question if they are wrong. It's either people fit their set of beliefs or not. The whole notion of belief itself is something that you can't prove physically nor mathematically. Trying to argue with someone that grounds their arguments in human emotions and preconceptions (belief) instead of rationality is a lost cause.

This is exactly what I told the judge at my petty theft trial!